access/usability, RPP, 73–76
advocacy groups, 1
pressures of, 3
aesthetics, RPP, 71–73
Bloomingdale Trail, outcomes of, 106
Callowhill Neighborhood Association (CNA), 66, 83
Center City District (CCD), 10, 68, 75, 121
involvement, 107
Chicago Department of Transportation (CDOT), 44
Chicago Department of Zoning and Land Use Planning (CZLUP), 44
Chicago Park District (CPD), 44
Chicago, park projects, 7, 8
Chinatown, 72
coalition, FHL and, 28–31
Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) program, 50, 109
connect approach, 112–117
creating discourse, 4
Lowline, 96–100
RPP, 69
David, J., 15–20
Delancey Underground, 90
Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC), 71–72
discourse
creating, 4
envisioning, 3–4
FHL, 20–22
Friends of the 606, 45–46
legitimating, 4
Lowline, 94
RPP, 69–70
envisioning, creating, and legitimating (ECL) framework, 6, 11
envisioning discourse, 3–4
FHL, 23–28
Friends of the 606, 46–51
Lowline, 94–96
RPP, 71–76
Falcone Flyover, 29
501c(3) groups, 4. See also Philadelphia’s Friends of the Rail Park (RPP)
flex approach, 118–122
Friends of the 606, 41–42
dimension and cost, 51–55
discourse, 45–46
envisioning discourse, 46–51
history, 42–45
legitimating dimension, 55–61
population, 57–58
role, 54–55
Friends of the Bloomingdale Trail (FBT), 116, 125–127. See also Friends of the 606
ability, 110
Friends of the High Line (FHL), 13–15, 37–39, 109, 115, 125–127
abilities, 30–31
capacity of, 114
and coalition, 28–31
discourse, 20–22
envisioning discourse, 23–28
history, 15–20
legitimating dimension, 31–36
population, 34
Friends of the Park (FoTP) group, 9
Hammond, R., 15–20
High Line, 9, 111. See also Friends of the High Line (FHL)
dimensions, 22
institutional dimensions, 117
outcomes, 106
reconciling competing logics, 108
RPP, 82–85
infrastructure, 123, 125
institutional entrepreneurship, 2–3
institutional logics, 2–5
contributions, 6–7
creating discourse, 4
envisioning discourse, 3–4
legitimating discourse, 4
park, the, 5
pressures, 3
viability and sustainability, 3
Kise, Straw Kolodner (KSK), 72
legitimating discourse, 4, 31–36
Friends of the 606, 55–61
Lowline, 100–102
RPP, 78–85
Lowline, 89, 111, 114–115
creating themes, 97–100
discourse, 94
envisioning discourse, 94–96
history, 89–93
institutional dimensions, 94, 117
legitimating discourse, 100–102
outcomes, 106
reconciling competing logics, 108
Lowline Lab, 11
Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), 97
neighborhood gentrification, FBT, 57–61
neighborhood, RPP, 78–82
neighborhood safety and security, FBT, 55–57
neighborhood safety theme, 56
New York, park projects, 7, 8
particularly Chinatown’s development group (PCDC), 79
Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation (PCDC), 71
Philadelphia, park projects, 7, 8
Philadelphia’s Friends of the Rail Park (RPP), 65–66, 110–111
development and cost, 76–78
discourse, 69–70
envisioning discourse, 71–76
history, 66–69
legitimating discourse, 78–85
population
FHL, 34
Friends of the 606, 57–58
post-opening discourse, 20–21
pre-opening discourse, 20–21
Rail Park. See also Philadelphia’s Friends of the Rail Park (RPP)
institutional dimensions, 70, 117
outcomes, 106
reconciling competing logics, 108
Rails-to-Trails Conservancy (RTC), 44
Reading Viaduct Project (RVP), 66
reconciling competing logics, 107–112
balance and consistency, 112–117
flex approach, 118–122
relatability, 113
Seward Park Urban Renewal Area (SPURA) project, 91, 92, 121–122
606 discourse
institutional dimensions, 46, 117
reconciling competing logics, 108
Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA), 67
Special West Chelsea District, 19
Trail/606, 10
trail access point, 47
Trust for Public Land (TPL), 41, 44
FBT and, 52
Underground Development Foundation, 90
Undeveloped High Line, 95
un-programmed access park, 51
Viaduct section, 67